Allegory Allure THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA 98 words themselves imply, can etymologically be applied to any fig. form of expression of thought. In actual usage in theology, the term is employed in a restricted sense, being used however in three ways, -viz. rhetoricaUy, hermeneutically and homi¬ letically. In the fcst-mentioned sense it is the ordinary aUegory ot rhetoric, wffich is usually defined as an extended or continued metaphor, this exten¬ sion expanding from two or more statements to a whole volume, like Bunyan's Pilgrim's Progress. Allegories of this character abound in the Scrip¬ tures, both in OT and in NT. Instructive exam¬ ples ot this kind are found in Ps 80 8-19; Eocl 12 3-7; Jn 10 1-16; Eph 6 11-17. According to traditional interpretation of both the Jewish exe¬ gesis and of the Catholic and Protestant churches the entire book of Cant is such an allegory. The subject is discussed in full in Terry's Biblical Hermeneutics, etc, ch vu, 214-38. In the ffistory of Bibhcal exegesis aUegory rep¬ resents a distinct type of interpretation, dating back to pre-Cffiistian times, praotiaed particularly by the Alex Jews, and adopted by the early Church Fathers and still practised and defended by the Roman Catholic church. Tffis method insists that the Uteral sense, particularly of historical passages, does not exhaust the di-rinely purposed meamng of such passages, but that these latter also include a deeper and higher sphitual and mystical sense. The fourfold sense ascribed to the Scriptures finds its expression in the well-known saying: Littera gesta docet; quid credos, allegorica; moralis, quid agas; quid speres, anagogica ("The letter shows things done; what you are to believe, the allegoric; what you are to do, the moral; what you are to hope, the anagogic"), according to which the allegorical is the ffidden dogmatical meaffing to be found in every passage. Cremer, in his Biblico-Theological New Testament Lexicon, shows that this method of finding a hidden thought behind the simple statement of a passage, although practised so ex¬ tensively on the Je-srish side by Aristobulus and especially Philo, is not of Jewish origin, but was, particularly by the latter, taken from the Alex Greeks (who before this had interpreted Gr my¬ thology as the expression of higher religious con¬ ceptions) and appUed to a deeper explanation ot OT historical data, together with its theophanies, antffiopomorphisms, antffiopopathies, and the Uke, which in their plain meaning were regarded as unworthy ot a place in the Divine revelation of the Scriptures. Such allegorizing became the common custom of the early Christian church, although not practised to the same extent in aU sections, the Syrian church exffibiting the greatest degree of sobriety in tffis respect. In this offiy Jewish prec¬ edent was followed; the parapffiases commonly known as the Tg, the Midr, and later in its ex¬ tremest form in the Kabbalah, all showed this mark of eisegesis instead ot exegesis. This whole false hermeneutical principle and its application orig¬ inated doubtless in an unhistorical conception of what the Scriptures are and how they originated. It is characteristic of the NT, and one ot the evi¬ dences of its inspiration, that in the enthe Biblical literature of that age, both Jewish and Christian, it is the only book that does not practise allego¬ rizing but abides by the principle of the lit. interpre¬ tation. Nor is Paul's exegesis, in Gal 4 21-31 an application of false allegorical methods. Here in ver 24 the term allegoroumena need not be taken in the techffical sense as expressive ot a method of interpretation, but merely as a para¬ pffiase of the preceding thought; or, it taken tech- ffically, the whole can be regarded as an argumentum ad hominem, a way of demonstration found also else¬ where in Paul's writings. The Protestant church. begmning with Luther, has at all times rejected this allegorizing and adhered to the sate and sane principle, practised by Cffiist and the entire NT, -riz. Sensum ne inferos, sed efferas ("Do not carry a meanmg ffito [the Scriptures] but draw it out of [the Scriptures]"). It is true that the older Protestant theology stiU adheres to a sensum mysticus in the Scriptures, but by this it means those passages in wffich the sense is conveyed not per verba (through words), but per res verbis descriptas ("through things described by means of words"), as e.g. in the parable and the type. In homiletics allegorizing is applied to the method wffich draws sphitual. truths from common his¬ torical statements, as e.g. when the heaUng of a leper by Christ is made the basis ot an exposition of the healing of the soul by the Saviour. Naturally this is not interpretation in the exegetical sense. G. H. Schodde ALLELUIA, al-5-ldo'ya. See Hallelujah. ALLEMETH, al'g-meth (inp??, 'allemeth, "con¬ cealment"; AV Alemeth, 1 Ch 6 60): Name ot a town in tribe of Benjamin, near Anathoth, one ot the cities given to the sons of Aaron, the same as Almon of Josh 21 18. The AV Alemeth (q.v.) is based upon the Heb reading fToby, 'alemeth. Its site is the modern Aliffit, a vUlage a short dis¬ tance N.E. ot Anathoth. ALLIANCE, a-U'ans: Frequent references are made to alliances between the patriarchs and for¬ eigners. Abraham is reported to have 1. In the had "confederates" among the chiefs Patriarchal of the Canaanites (Gen 14 13). He Stories also alUed with Abimelech, king of Gerar (21 22-34). Isaac's alliance with Abimelech (26 26-34), which is offered as an ex¬ planation ot the name Beer-sheba (ver 33), appears to be a variant of the record of alliance between Abraham and Abimelech. Jacob formed an al¬ liance with Laban, the Syrian (31 44-54), by which Gilead was established as a boundary line between Israel and Aram. These treaties refer, in all probabiUty, to the early period of Israel's history, and throw a good deal of light upon the relation between Israel and the Philis and the Syrians imme¬ diately after the conquest of Canaan. The only reference to an alliance between Israel and foreign people prior to the conquest of Canaan, that might be regarded as historical, 2. In Pre- is that made between Israel and the Canaanitic Kenite tribes at the foot ot Sinai, the History precise nature ot wffich, however, is not very clearly indicated. Such al¬ liances led to intermarriages between the members ot the allied tribes. Thus Moses married a Kenite woman (Jgs 1 16; 4 11). The patriarchal mar¬ riages refer to the existing conditions after the con¬ quest. Possibly one more alliance belonging to that period is that between Israel and Moab (Nu 26 1-3). According to the narrative, Israel be¬ came attached to the daughters of Moab, at Shittim, and was led astray after Baal-peor. Its historicity is proven from the prophetic aUusions to this event (of Hos 9 10; Mic 6 6). The invading hordes ot Israel met with strong opposition on the part of the natives of Pal (Jgs 1 21.27-36). In time, alliances were 3. During formed with some of them, which the Con- generaUy led, as might be expected, quest to considerable trouble. One concrete illustration is preserved in the story of the Gibeonites (Josh 9). Intermarriages were fre¬ quent. The tribe of Judah thus became consolidated tffiough the alliance and the amalgamation with the Kenites and Calebites (Jgs 1 10-16). These